My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-03-2005 WS
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
10-03-2005 WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:50:20 PM
Creation date
8/1/2018 1:35:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
10/3/2005
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
10/3/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
39
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Construction options: Volunteers <br />The Commission looked into whether high schools, trade schools, vocational <br />schools or colleges would be capable of building the Groveland Park Building. It <br />appears that it is possible. A great deal of coordination would be needed. There <br />was also the issue - can this be done legally? The City's legal counsel and the <br />City's insurance agent were contacted. In summary, the City could allow a <br />volunteer group to construct a park building with few legal or insurance issues <br />involved. The main problem would be that if a volunteer group were to be <br />covered under the City's insurance policy, the City would need to supervise the <br />project. Given this, and the fact that the material cost would remain the same, <br />there probably would be little advantage to this option. <br /> <br /> <br />Other options - Prefab construction <br />This is an option. However, the issues of maintenance costs, durability, and <br />longevity exist. <br /> <br />Bidding / Contract Options <br />There are three possible bid revision options: <br /> <br />1.) Revise the plan – this was reviewed and discussed by the Commission. <br />There are little recommended changes other than perhaps having a single <br />bathroom as a bid alternate (and keep the AC unit as a bid alternate). <br /> <br />2.) Increase the construction timeframe by revising the specifications to allow <br />for construction any time during the 2006 construction season. This option <br />was also recommended by TKDA <br /> <br />3.) Increase the number of potential bidders – develop an information <br />campaign and target smaller bidders who typically do not use the <br />Construction Bulletin to know of potential projects and those contactors <br />who do not typically bid on government projects. <br /> <br /> <br />Commission Recommendation <br />A motion was made to direct Staff to bring this issue back to the City Council with <br />a summary of the options that were reviewed, discussed, and investigated by the <br />Commission; also, to present the Commissioner’s recommendation to re-bid this <br />project in an effort to obtain more favorable bids. This would done by changing <br />the specifications to give the contractor the entire 2006 construction season to <br />complete the project – have a December 1, 2006 substantial completion date. <br />There would also be an advertisement campaign to reach the smaller contractors <br />who typically do not bid on public contracts. The bid would also include a bid <br />alternate for the air conditioning unit it be installed. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.